A Comparative Study of Machine Learning Models for Breast Cancer Diagnosis Using the Wisconsin Diagnostic Dataset

Accurate and interpretable diagnostic models are vital for early detection of breast cancer. This paper presents a comparative analysis of four classifiers Logistic Regression (LogReg), Random Forest (RF), Gradient Boosting (GBRT), and a compact Multilayer Perceptron (MLP)on the Breast Cancer Wisconsin (Diagnostic) dataset. Classical models were optimised via grid search and stratified 5-fold cross-validation (CV), while the MLP used validation-based early stopping. On the heldout test set, Logistic Regression achieved the strongest overall balance of discrimination and calibration (AUC 0.996, AP 0.998), with competitive F1/accuracy. A computational analysis showed that Logistic Regression trains orders of magnitude faster than ensembles and the MLP, and still delivers near real-time inference; GBRT offered slightly faster per-sample inference but at a substantially higher training cost. These results reinforce that transparent, well-calibrated linear models can match ensemble and neural baselines on small structured clinical data, supporting their suitability for time-sensitive decision support.

Publication Details

Journal
Staffordshire Online Repository (Staffordshire University)
Published
2025-11-03
Primary Topic
AI in cancer detection
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A Comparative Study of Machine Learning Models for Breast Cancer Diagnosis Using the Wisconsin Diagnostic Dataset

Staffordshire Online Repository (Staffordshire University)
AI in cancer detection
article

A Comparative Study of Machine Learning Models for Breast Cancer Diagnosis Using the Wisconsin Diagnostic Dataset

article en

Abstract

Accurate and interpretable diagnostic models are vital for early detection of breast cancer. This paper presents a comparative analysis of four classifiers Logistic Regression (LogReg), Random Forest (RF), Gradient Boosting (GBRT), and a compact Multilayer Perceptron (MLP)on the Breast Cancer Wisconsin (Diagnostic) dataset. Classical models were optimised via grid search and stratified 5-fold cross-validation (CV), while the MLP used validation-based early stopping. On the heldout test set, Logistic Regression achieved the strongest overall balance of discrimination and calibration (AUC 0.996, AP 0.998), with competitive F1/accuracy. A computational analysis showed that Logistic Regression trains orders of magnitude faster than ensembles and the MLP, and still delivers near real-time inference; GBRT offered slightly faster per-sample inference but at a substantially higher training cost. These results reinforce that transparent, well-calibrated linear models can match ensemble and neural baselines on small structured clinical data, supporting their suitability for time-sensitive decision support.

Staffordshire Online Repository (Staffordshire University)
Openalex Percentile: Top 19%
AI in cancer detection
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

A Comparative Study of Machine Learning Models for Breast Cancer Diagnosis Using the Wisconsin Diagnostic Dataset · Staffordshire Online Repository (Staffordshire University) (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS